[ih] RFC 1918 addresses

[Scott O. Bradner]

as an IPng AD I was “in the loop” - 

10 was chosen not directly because it was the ARPANET assignment but
because a LOT of software had coded-in use of net 10 (because it was the ARPANET assignment)

Yakov suggested net 10 and Jon agreed (is what I recall)

Scott



> On Oct 6, 2017, at 8:59 AM, Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net> wrote:
> 
> As I recall, 10/8 was because it was the only prefix still around of that size (having until recently been the ARPANET's IP network number).  I suspect similar reasons drove the other two, but don't know as I wasn't close to this process.
> 
> Craig
> 
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 8:42 AM, John Kristoff <jtk at depaul.edu> wrote:
> Elsewhere someone asked why the prefixes defined in RFC 1918 (10/8,
> 172.12/12, 192.168/16) were the codified private prefixes.  Does anyone
> know the definitive reason, if there was one, why these prefixes were
> selected over or instead of any other?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> John
> _______
> internet-history mailing list
> internet-history at postel.org
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> Contact list-owner at postel.org for assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> *****
> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and mailing lists.
> For Raytheon business, please email: craig.partridge at raytheon.com
> _______
> internet-history mailing list
> internet-history at postel.org
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> Contact list-owner at postel.org for assistance.